No one is beating people over the head with anything and it is not wordsmithing for the sake of power. This is your interpretation and a weak line of defence. I express my views in my own distinct way, respecting the English language as my step-mother tongue.
What Do We Mean By "Resolution"?
- Thread starter Ron Resnick
- Start date
No one is beating people over the head with anything and it is not wordsmithing for the sake of power. This is your interpretation and a weak line of defence. I express my views in my own distinct way, respecting the English language as my step-mother tongue.
Hello RJ,
Thank you for your company, not to mention your "reserved" enthusiasm in expressing your spontaneous and heart-felt sentiments.
Cheers Kostas!
It was a complete Paradigm shift in music, for me at least. Have very distantly heard similar tunes before but nothing quite like this, especially at this supreme level. It was certainly an eye opener plus a jaw dropping experience to share the brilliance of Martin Logan's full range stats. Definitely one of a kind and that makes me more than delighted to own the CLX's as well. I definitely made a very wise choice, no doubt!
This special kind of transducer is an end game for me, and that's saying quite a lot, considering the various types of panels I've owned in the past, even running my own dealership business with Maggie's and Apogee's, in addition to owning the mighty Apogee Diva's at one point. Right along somewhere in between our reference components, we've always used high powered tube amplifiers from CJ, and they just love electroststs!
Although, I haven't quite finalised my TT rig and digital gear, at this level it's so hard to let go of my current equipment and justify the exhorbitant spend to consider upgrading. .. I most probably will just hold onto to what I've got! Afterall, you really don't know what you've got until it's gone!
Probably looking at retirement in a couple years, who knows!
Cheers mate, it was an absolute pleasure!
Woof woof! Raj
Many good explanations and views on the term resolution. But how does one improve resolution in the audio system. The most effective way is bringing down the room noise. The live end dead end (LEDE) principal is very effective in bringing the decay and reverberation time of the room under control.
Move your listening position closer to the speakers will also give you more direct sound and less room reflections, resolution will improve but at the same time you may loose a bit of the spatialness the room gives. I will also say that speakers with constant directivity will improve the resolution, because it will be easier to remove the first reflections of the room and again control the direct/reflected sound ratio.
It should be obvious that you need an even in room frequency response. No point in having high resolution if the FR is skewed. As icing on the cake the time domain should be taken care of through FIR filters, this removes the phase rotation in the x-over and at the same time improves the group delay, so sound (fundamental tones and the related harmonics) from various speaker drivers will arrive simultaneously to the listener.
Regards Sebastian
Move your listening position closer to the speakers will also give you more direct sound and less room reflections, resolution will improve but at the same time you may loose a bit of the spatialness the room gives. I will also say that speakers with constant directivity will improve the resolution, because it will be easier to remove the first reflections of the room and again control the direct/reflected sound ratio.
It should be obvious that you need an even in room frequency response. No point in having high resolution if the FR is skewed. As icing on the cake the time domain should be taken care of through FIR filters, this removes the phase rotation in the x-over and at the same time improves the group delay, so sound (fundamental tones and the related harmonics) from various speaker drivers will arrive simultaneously to the listener.
Regards Sebastian
Hello Sebastian,
In principle, I agree with your thoughts and you are absolutely correct in highlighting the importance of the listening space. Although the LEDE principle is usually applied in relatively small studios, it does not mean that domestic set-ups should not adhere to the fundamental acoustic principles so that the listening space can maximally contribute towards the optimal overall performance of the system. The speaker \ room interface is the most critical factor and different speaker types will react differently, based on how they launch and propagate their sound waves.
In my approx. 140 cubic metre dedicated space, I have ensured that my electrostatic speakers fulfil the minimum 10 ms reverberation requirement and, even though my room is conducive to good sound and dipoles are known to be more benign to boundary reflections, I have still strived to achieve a listening position which takes advantage of the RFZ (reflection-free zone ) principle.
Such set-ups tend to minimise the acoustic signature of the listening space, allowing the acoustic signature of the recorded venue to be reproduced by the direct sound field and not be smeared and "distorted" by the reflected field, although of course the room still exerts an influence on the sound that reaches the listener. A relatively large room is still needed in order to have a smoother frequency response and a more positive effect on the lower spectrum. Spatialness and soundstage scaling are not affected if the appropriate distance behind the speakers and between speakers is maintained.
Time \ phase domain issues become more problematical with multi-driver and complex x-over set-ups and is an area beyond my experience and knowledge.
Resolution, as a term, is almost a neutral concept. I am referring to HIGH resolution, which is the intrinsic trait of a relatively linear, neutral and very transparent system and a pre-requisite in order to retrieve as much as possible of the recored information ( some people conflate this phenomenon with accentuated artefacts ). Once this information enters the speakers, then all the points that you mentioned become very relevant.
Cheers, Kostas.
Hi Kostas.
We are pretty much on the same page, just with different rooms and setups. Panel speakers have their virtues, but needs careful setup, not to close to the front wall. You seem to have your ground covered pretty good, with a relatively big room to accommodate them. Bet it sounds good.
I also have a dedicated music room, it is L-shaped thus not symmetrical, so I listen in an area 3,6 meter wide (11 feet) by 6,5 m long (20 feet). I play on big DIY synergy horns with a coverage angle of 90 degrees horizontal and 60 degrees vertical. It controls the sound directivity down to 100 hz. So like your panels I get low dispersion in the vertical plane and can also control the horizontal dispersion. Counter intuitive, such big horns work very well in relatively small rooms. By placing them parallel out to the room wall sides and fire them 45 degrees into the room, the 1. reflection, seen from LP, is actually on the opposite wall, thus the RFZ criteria is met. This way it is easy to remove the early side 1. reflection. Pretty neat.
Smaller rooms will definitely improve with the LEDE method. Dampening the surfaces close to the speakers, side walls, wall behind speakers and also the ceiling and then disperse the sound behind the listening position. This will give the optimum conditions for the speakers to launch the soundwave on a close to pitch black background, while maintaining some late reflections for a more spacious and enveloped sound.
Correctly setup constant directivity speakers combined with the LEDE and FIR filter (DRC) creates a first direct plane wave, that is minimal distorted in both the frequency and time domain, so the output sound signal from the speakers represents as closely as possible, the input signal.
The result is truly great, which measurements also confirms. Low decay time, RT60 between 0.2-0.3 sec. linear downward tilting FR, good impulse response and step response. It improves all the attributes we associate with good high fidelity sound. Minimising the unwanted smearing room sound, will reveal the recordings more truthfully and elevate the resolution.
Best
Sebastian
We are pretty much on the same page, just with different rooms and setups. Panel speakers have their virtues, but needs careful setup, not to close to the front wall. You seem to have your ground covered pretty good, with a relatively big room to accommodate them. Bet it sounds good.
I also have a dedicated music room, it is L-shaped thus not symmetrical, so I listen in an area 3,6 meter wide (11 feet) by 6,5 m long (20 feet). I play on big DIY synergy horns with a coverage angle of 90 degrees horizontal and 60 degrees vertical. It controls the sound directivity down to 100 hz. So like your panels I get low dispersion in the vertical plane and can also control the horizontal dispersion. Counter intuitive, such big horns work very well in relatively small rooms. By placing them parallel out to the room wall sides and fire them 45 degrees into the room, the 1. reflection, seen from LP, is actually on the opposite wall, thus the RFZ criteria is met. This way it is easy to remove the early side 1. reflection. Pretty neat.
Smaller rooms will definitely improve with the LEDE method. Dampening the surfaces close to the speakers, side walls, wall behind speakers and also the ceiling and then disperse the sound behind the listening position. This will give the optimum conditions for the speakers to launch the soundwave on a close to pitch black background, while maintaining some late reflections for a more spacious and enveloped sound.
Correctly setup constant directivity speakers combined with the LEDE and FIR filter (DRC) creates a first direct plane wave, that is minimal distorted in both the frequency and time domain, so the output sound signal from the speakers represents as closely as possible, the input signal.
The result is truly great, which measurements also confirms. Low decay time, RT60 between 0.2-0.3 sec. linear downward tilting FR, good impulse response and step response. It improves all the attributes we associate with good high fidelity sound. Minimising the unwanted smearing room sound, will reveal the recordings more truthfully and elevate the resolution.
Best
Sebastian
Interesting thread and I would add: pedal usage on piano. I find this subtle low frequency information to be a true occurance, the recording of which depends on microphone placement. But if it's recorded then I want to hear it. It adds immeasurably to my enjoyment of, for example, Barenboim's Beethoven Sonatas ("on his new piano") because I listen with scores. Recently demoed some ultra high end speaker cables against my own, and the pedal information was gone. This was a material lack of resolution, for me a deal breaker.
My room. Smaller than yours. Zero dampening ( other than a carpet). Seating position around 9” from back wall. Speakers. 2.5-3ft from back wall.
Near field /far field? Not an issue.
Almost zero toe in.
reflections? Hardly
Sound wise? Spot on. It can be done.
Crystal Cable Ultimate Dream (not looking to make any enemies lol)
I agree it can be done. I have a sofa and a couple of chairs in my small room and I consider them to be treatment just like the oriental rug. My head is about 18 inches from the back wall and I have large corner horn speakers in my two front wall corners. The wooden slats in the blinds covering my windows are also adjusted to affect the sound.
This is but only one example of low level retrieval and, rightly so, very important to you just like it is for me, for the note is NOT complete until all of the minute elements that comprise it are manifested, i.e resolved by a transparent and highly resolving system.
Any low level musical information that one hears in a live event, assuming that one sits relatively close to the musicians (like microphones usually do! ), should equally be heard via a good playback system. All of the recorded venue's many subtle cues which, in fact, emanate from the musicians and which enhance the musician's intent and expression, collectively constitute a vital "extra" dimension in their own music-making. By extension, if this additional dimension is missing in our playback systems, then our complete appreciation of the musician's art is also amiss. For example, the complete decay of the note will be determined by the acoustic nature of the venue and the musician's technique; in turn, the playback system should be able to reproduce this complete personality of the played note and the acoustic venue's personality.
There are so many intricate"intra-notal" ( apologies to lexicographers for my "poetic licence" ) timbral under \ over tones, inflections and other nuances from the initial attack of the note, continuing to its sustain and culminating to its decay. In my view, the complete personality of the note is both sonically and musically compromised if it is NOT rendered by the system.
These are not artefacts; they are vital sonic cues and clues that enhance the listening experience, do justice to the musician and, in the absence of visual cues, take us closer to the suspension of disbelief ( a subjectively controversial term in itself ).
Cheers, Kostas.
Interesting review of the Jadis JS1 Mk. V DAC which gets at the heart of the trade-off that can arise between resolution and musicality:
https://www.stereophile.com/content/jadis-js1-mkv-reference-da-processor
Thanks. Brilliant writing by Alex Halbestadt. Excellent quote from Michael Lavorgna in the article:
"Resolution can be a tricky thing when it comes to digital," my friend Michael Lavorgna recently told me. "Too much, and my focus shifts from music to sound; too little, and I become less engaged." Lavorgna, a visual artist and proprietor of the online audio-and-music publication Twittering Machines
Similar threads
